Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Barred (from meeting with attorney), Remand Extension

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Email
Roni Hammermann, Tova Szeintuch (reporting)

Translation: Marganit W.


Judge: Lieut. Col. Zeev Afik

Investigator: Ihab Halabi

Defense: Atty. Ma’amoun Hashim


Two cases in the docket – one of them of a detainee barred from seeing counsel.


Muhammad Shaheen – ID 403365443,  a resident of Bethlehem.

He was arrested on 24.5.18 and this is his third remand extension.

He is suspected of firing a gun at the Tunnels Checkpoint. Shaheen is barred from seeing his attorney.


The Investigator requests an 8-day remand extension. The defense asks many questions about objects found at the scene and about possible collaborators, but he is always referred to the secret file.

The defense claims that the suspect was drunk at the time of the incident. Even though he asked the policeman on the scene to test him for drunkenness, they did nothing, and now, of course, there is no point in testing him for alcohol.

The weapon probably belongs to his father who serves at the PA police.


The Investigator claims that “there is no indication that the suspect was drunk, and the arresting officers did not have the impression that he was drunk”.

The suspect fired a few bullets but did not hit anyone. It all took place at night: it was a prolonged incident, he concludes (and the defense concurs).


From the exchange between the investigator and the attorney we gather that the police was asked to carry out a psychological evaluation (it is not clear if the suspect himself requested it, or the family did so through the attorney). The attorney asks to see the test results. He is given a written paper, which we cannot see: it is a short text written in very small script.

The attorney requests a psychiatric evaluation from an outside source.

Judge: Then why don’t you get one?

The attorney replies that the detainee has been barred from seeing his attorney since the day of his arrest: he has not discussed this issue with him or with his family.


The psychiatrist gave the investigator permission to continue the investigation.

A Prison Authority doctor recommended giving the suspect pills (it is not clear what kind). Apparently, he had been treated before his arrest.


Defense summation: the respondent claims he is not responsible for the incident. He gave a statement to the police. The attorney moves for a release.

After we left the court with the attorney, the judge conversed with the suspect for about ten minutes (longer than usual). When the detainee had been taken out, we went in.


Judge’s decision: 4-day remand extension to complete the investigation.


Mahmoud Shahdi Abu Ghosh – ID 408836406, a resident of Ramallah.

He is suspected of throwing rocks.

During the interrogation he was also accused of shooting.

The Investigator requests a 12-day remand.


Defense: When did the alleged shooting take place?

Answer: Eight months ago. The details of his participation in the incident are in the secret file.

Question: Did you find him in possession of weapon or bullets?’

Answer: It’s in the secret file.

Question: Is he cooperating?

Answer: Partially.


Judge’s summation: (to the investigator) He was arrested a long time ago, and there is no progress in the investigation… Abu Ghosh was arrested on 17.5.18. This is his third remand extension. No doubt the charges against him do not warrant his release because of the risk involved. However, the requested remand is too long. You must decide if there is enough evidence to indict the suspect.


Remand extension of 7 days.